David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
New Scholasticism 12 (2):197-198 (1938)
Imagine that you receive information on the choices made by a decision maker (DM) from all subsets of some set X. You know nothing about the context of these choices. You look for an explanation for the DM’s behavior. You would probably look first for a single rationale explaining the behavior. Specifically, you would seek a rationalizing ordering—that is, a linear ordering on X, such that for every choice set A ⊆ X, the DM’s choice from A is the best element in A according to the ordering. You recall that the “Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives” Axiom (IIA)—which requires that the chosen element from a set also be chosen from every subset that contains it—is a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of such an explanation.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Ivan Moscati & Paola Tubaro, Random Behavior and the as-If Defense of Rational Choice Theory in Demand Experiments.
Ran Spiegler (2001). Inferring a Linear Ordering Over a Power Set. Theory and Decision 51 (1):31-49.
Bairj Donabedian (2003). The Natural Realm of Social Law. Sociological Theory 21 (2):175-190.
David Pincus (1997). The Dense Linear Ordering Principle. Journal of Symbolic Logic 62 (2):438-456.
Walter Bossert (2001). Choices, Consequences, and Rationality. Synthese 129 (3):343 - 369.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads1 ( #468,101 of 1,169,326 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?